Author Topic: Should u2 release/have released 2 albums?  (Read 484 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline JamietheEdgefan

  • Child of Grace
  • **
  • Posts: 1,588
  • Infinity's a great place to start!
Should u2 release/have released 2 albums?
« on: January 16, 2011, 03:42:01 PM »
I think i've had an epiphany - if u2 wants to make everyone happy, delivering on both the commercial and creative fronts, why not release two albums???

It wouldn't just be cool from an 'omg we have 2 albums' perspective, but it would solve two problems: A commercial album could have great, straightforward, catchy tunes that make the audience go wild on tour, and an experimental album could be a creative outlet for the band, and would satisfy the hardcore fans who want to see how far u2 can push the envelope.

I think the No Line compromise made everyone unhappy - u2 tried to make NLOTH accessible and experimental at the same time... in doing so, they made an album that doesn't catch fire live, and which is criticised for not being an 'achtung baby' style leap.
What really annoys me is how NLOTH's experimental side was compromised, and for no good reason - they cut down the amount of songs on the 360 tour anyway. And look at SUC - it was very obviously put on the album to be made a single and get the crowd going live, and neither of these were even tried... what's worse, it happened at the expense of Every Breaking Wave. Plus, have you heard the original Stand up Comedy versions? They're more experimental, but oh boy do they rock!

But personal opinion on songs aside, it does seem this NLOTH compromise ironically prevented both of u2's aims - to make a catchy album that would go down well live, and allow them to explore their experimental side.

So yeah, if u2 ever read this... when you release the 'next big u2 album' (maybe not the mid-tour DM one, that window of opportunity has probably passed), i think it would be a great idea if you released 2 albums, one fulfilling the 'accessible' function, the other the 'experimental'. Isn't that a great idea? I know you guys would have the material - you always go on about having '50 or 60' songs, and wanting to release quick follow ups!

So do it! Picture this: 2012 - the 360 tour has ended, but u2 want to make more music. They re-recruit Rubin, and make an album with 'big club beats and massive rock guitar riffs' (that's actually a bono quote in reference to that material), which sells and tours well, and at the same time release Songs of Ascent, which is full of crazy, evolved musical ideas that wouldn't necessarily work live but nonetheless create a new musical genre.

I'd say it's naive to think this would happen, but come on! It would satisfy all criteria! And do so much better than No Line!

What do you guys think???



Offline Miami66

  • Airborne Ranger
  • ***
  • Posts: 8,971
  • The goal is soul
Re: Should u2 release/have released 2 albums?
« Reply #1 on: January 16, 2011, 03:42:34 PM »
how about one album ASAP

Offline JamietheEdgefan

  • Child of Grace
  • **
  • Posts: 1,588
  • Infinity's a great place to start!
Re: Should u2 release/have released 2 albums?
« Reply #2 on: January 16, 2011, 03:51:46 PM »
That too, that too